John T, Thank-you. I wish you all the best. The terms are subjective just like motives. That is why I politely ask others to define their terms and disengage those who refuse. Experience tells me, those who refuse to define their terms are not interested in real science but in promoting their religi...

Specializing in NT history seems like an easy way to get unmoored, since we're always going over the same stuff. Behavioral science suggests we end up confirming our biases in that kind of situation - both for positive and negative info, too. Not the best way. Maybe there's a way out of the impasse...

Personally, I think your definition of what is and isn't syncretism is rather wider than mine. If you're interested in reviewing some literature around the subject: Syncretism/antisyncretism: The Politics of Religious Synthesis , Stewart and Shaw, 1994 Dialogue and Syncretism , Gort, 1989. Dated an...

Isolated? The notion of a religion isolate is an intriguing one, but I can't think of any examples. Stable? Consistent? Coherent? A religion can be syncretistic and all of these things in at least some dimensions; ultimately, stability, consistency and cohesion are not qualities which any religion ...

Personally, I think that your saying that syncretism is at least a very common feature of many religions (I'm not entirely sure about 'all religion, at all times') is a good point. How do you imagine a non-syncretistic religion emerging or persisting? What sort of words might you use to characteriz...